Gay Marriage..Ure thought - Page 4 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 16th, 2008, 02:11 PM   #61
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,686
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGoodBuzz View Post
Wow Dave.... I'm STOKED!!!! This is the first thing I've seen you post that offers a true respect for those that are outside of your belief system. Awesome!
I often withhold certain opinions of mine because I don't want to be unclear. Many times someone can say something, and someone can read what they want, I suppose that happens anyhow. For example, becaue I do not support the gay lifestyle, I may automatically be equated with people who call gays names or beat them down, or whatever the case may be. I have said in the past that I respect certain atheists and agnostics on this board, I still believe they will die in their sins, and I still tell them that, but I DO respect them. Others I do not respect because they are not respectable. Not all gays are respectable, not all Christians are repsectable.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old May 16th, 2008, 02:13 PM   #62
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,686
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesova View Post
why is cohabitation or perma-dating bad for our society. I mean if the only thing thing that is missing from one of those relationships is a ring and a church service, where is the harm? to society, not your religion...
I will tell you exactly why, it supports conditional love. Conditional love is not a good foundation for builing families. Conditional love says that as long as you don't screw up, as long as I still like you, and as long as it is convenient, we will be a family. Strong families make strong societies, and when the base of a family is off, so is society. The intention of marriage is to remove the conditions and make it permanant. It is good for a man to committ himself to a woman, and then to his family. I am not saying that a cohabitation couple is without unconditional love, but as a majority it is very much a condition based system, that is why it is without proper permanance. The sad fact is that marriage is no longer highly esteemed in our culture, and it has resulted in married couples acting like they are co-habitating, which has the same problem of a weak foundation. So I realize a magic certificate does not make our soceity strong, but having it does something different in the relationship, it changes from mine and yours, to OURS.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 03:03 PM   #63
JeepsnDogs
Member
 
JeepsnDogs's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-15-08
Location: Howard City, MI
Posts: 45
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Seriously people! blueydchevygirl has it - hit the nail on the head....the nail being the guys in the group... Chica, Im sure we are a minority, but we all know that men have issues with their sexuality...gay men freak them out, gay women turn them on...

Marriage is the unity of two people who love eachother and want to spend their lives together. PERIOD. I have fag friends and lots of dyke friends...more power to them ALL! Do what YOU want. F society.
JeepsnDogs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 05:24 PM   #64
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,423
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeepsnDogs View Post
Seriously people! blueydchevygirl has it - hit the nail on the head....the nail being the guys in the group... Chica, Im sure we are a minority, but we all know that men have issues with their sexuality...gay men freak them out, gay women turn them on...

Marriage is the unity of two people who love eachother and want to spend their lives together. PERIOD. I have fag friends and lots of dyke friends...more power to them ALL! Do what YOU want. F society.
I hear ya. I still would like the gay community to call it something different. I feel they should have all the rights and privileges of straight couples who are married. I just don't like homosexual couples refering to their union as "marrage". Just my personal opinion. If gay couples end up with the term marrage for their union I'm not going to throw a fit, I just prefere they don't.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 05:28 PM   #65
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,423
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
I often withhold certain opinions of mine because I don't want to be unclear. Many times someone can say something, and someone can read what they want, I suppose that happens anyhow. For example, becaue I do not support the gay lifestyle, I may automatically be equated with people who call gays names or beat them down, or whatever the case may be. I have said in the past that I respect certain atheists and agnostics on this board, I still believe they will die in their sins, and I still tell them that, but I DO respect them. Others I do not respect because they are not respectable. Not all gays are respectable, not all Christians are repsectable.
If you remove the religious concerns from this debate and just look at gay couples in general I think most people would find that they are like straight couples in every way. There are good relationships, bad ones, psycho ones, dirtbag couples, rich couples, etc.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 05:51 PM   #66
jthomp
Senior Member
 
jthomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-01-06
Location: Linden MI
Posts: 979
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

No
jthomp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2008, 06:01 PM   #67
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,423
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Just a note: A large percentage of the gay people I've met I don't really like. A few are ok but I do not like flamers at all. I still believe they have the right to live how they choose no matter how I feel. As long as they don't say I have to live like they do, I will not expect them to live how I do. If I do not like a gay person (male or female) I simply stay away from them. That's exactly how I treat hetero people I dislike.
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 04:37 PM   #68
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,784
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuggets View Post
If you remove the religious concerns from this debate and just look at gay couples in general I think most people would find that they are like straight couples in every way. There are good relationships, bad ones, psycho ones, dirtbag couples, rich couples, etc.
bingo.
mikesova is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 05:18 PM   #69
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,686
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesova View Post
bingo.
You would also have to take the gay part out, and add the reproductive part.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 05:19 PM   #70
guest
.
 
Join Date: 12-14-06
Location: .
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to guest
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
You would also have to take the gay part out, and add the reproductive part.
x2 lol
guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 05:43 PM   #71
no1likesme
not Frank Sinatra
 
no1likesme's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-10-08
Location: shepherd, MI
Posts: 678
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to no1likesme Send a message via MSN to no1likesme
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuggets View Post
I hear ya. I still would like the gay community to call it something different. I feel they should have all the rights and privileges of straight couples who are married. I just don't like homosexual couples refering to their union as "marrage". Just my personal opinion. If gay couples end up with the term marrage for their union I'm not going to throw a fit, I just prefere they don't.
x2
no1likesme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 07:32 PM   #72
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,460
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

First, to address the original question, Yes, the Supreme Court and the right, and the responsibility to rule on whether laws are valid and constitutional. Imagine if it was your civil rights that a new law took away? Wouldn't you want some branch of government looking our for you rights?

That said, I think they are wrong in this case. I don't see that a law defining "marriage" as a bond between a man and a woman as a violation of anyones rights. It's the same for everyone. Everyone has the right to go find a willing able member of the opposite sex and get married. If you have decided that that type of relationship is not right for you and you want to do something else, thats fine, but I don't recognize your right to redefine "marriage" to include your "something else" just because it fits your needs and desires.

But I see bigger issue here that rarely get brought up. That is; Why is the government involved in the business of defining what "marriage" at all?

To answer my own question... I see 2 reasons;

1. To allow a couple to combine their resources and plan a permanent future together including joint ownership of property, inheritance of assets without having to have a will or involving lengthy court proceedings, the ability to have access to each others medical records and to make medical decisions for each other, and probably other things I'm not thinking of that help a couple live and a couple.

2. To make it easier for parents to care for kids, easing the financial burdens through tax breaks, family medical leave acts, joint insurance, and all the other things that are done to try to keep parents together and make it easier for them to joints acre for children.

So heres what I think should happen;

first, remove the word "marriage" from all laws and government code. Let "marriage" be something that is defined by the organization that if preforming the ceremony, but legally it means nothing.

Then, untangle and rewrite the laws.

Allow any couple homo or heterosexual to be able get the benefits of being a couple, call it something else, I don't care what.

Allow any family, defined as committed parents raising children, "married" or not, homo or heterosexual, to get the benifits of being a family.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 08:54 PM   #73
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,423
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Kerwin View Post
You would also have to take the gay part out, and add the reproductive part.
If you remove the religious concerns from this debate and just look at REPRODUCTIVE couples in general I think most people would find that they are like GAY couples in every way. There are good relationships, bad ones, psycho ones, dirtbag couples, rich couples, etc.

Is that what you ment?
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 08:55 PM   #74
Nuggets
I fix stuff!
 
Nuggets's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-15-06
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 13,423
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by InBBA View Post
On the flip side I hope that they have to pay the same to get divorced that Straight couples do.

You know the saying, pennies to get married thousands to get divorced.

Would there be a custody battle for the gerbil?
Nuggets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2008, 09:54 PM   #75
guest
.
 
Join Date: 12-14-06
Location: .
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to guest
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuggets View Post
If you remove the religious concerns from this debate and just look at REPRODUCTIVE couples in general I think most people would find that they are like GAY couples in every way. There are good relationships, bad ones, psycho ones, dirtbag couples, rich couples, etc.

Is that what you ment?

Maybe in your world two dicks can make a kid, but not in this one.
guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 05:24 AM   #76
BlueydChevygal
Senior Member
 
BlueydChevygal's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-16-08
Location: Interlochen, MI
Posts: 171
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via Yahoo to BlueydChevygal
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a.j. hall View Post
Maybe in your world two dicks can make a kid, but not in this one.
But, there is adoption and there is artificial insemination, which many gay couples do!!
BlueydChevygal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 08:13 AM   #77
L4CX
Out for the Summer!
 
L4CX's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-07
Location: Hillsdale, MI
Posts: 4,926
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
First, to address the original question, Yes, the Supreme Court and the right, and the responsibility to rule on whether laws are valid and constitutional. Imagine if it was your civil rights that a new law took away? Wouldn't you want some branch of government looking our for you rights?

That said, I think they are wrong in this case. I don't see that a law defining "marriage" as a bond between a man and a woman as a violation of anyones rights. It's the same for everyone. Everyone has the right to go find a willing able member of the opposite sex and get married. If you have decided that that type of relationship is not right for you and you want to do something else, thats fine, but I don't recognize your right to redefine "marriage" to include your "something else" just because it fits your needs and desires.

But I see bigger issue here that rarely get brought up. That is; Why is the government involved in the business of defining what "marriage" at all?

To answer my own question... I see 2 reasons;

1. To allow a couple to combine their resources and plan a permanent future together including joint ownership of property, inheritance of assets without having to have a will or involving lengthy court proceedings, the ability to have access to each others medical records and to make medical decisions for each other, and probably other things I'm not thinking of that help a couple live and a couple.

2. To make it easier for parents to care for kids, easing the financial burdens through tax breaks, family medical leave acts, joint insurance, and all the other things that are done to try to keep parents together and make it easier for them to joints acre for children.

So heres what I think should happen;

first, remove the word "marriage" from all laws and government code. Let "marriage" be something that is defined by the organization that if preforming the ceremony, but legally it means nothing.

Then, untangle and rewrite the laws.

Allow any couple homo or heterosexual to be able get the benefits of being a couple, call it something else, I don't care what.

Allow any family, defined as committed parents raising children, "married" or not, homo or heterosexual, to get the benifits of being a family.

I completely agree with you about taking "marriage" our of the law. I mean, Maybe not take it out, but don't require that word. In my opinion if two guys want to get together and make a Life time comitment, that's thier choice. If they want to Adopt Kids, that's thier choice. But I just don't want them to call it Marriage.

This is Somethign I've thought of but I'm probably wrong in saying this but....I think that Marriage is a sacrement of the Church and to participate in a sacrement of the church you have to acknowledge your sins. To the Christian Church, Homosexuality (among MANY things Sexual) is a Sin. If they live a life Blatantly in sin, then they are not able to take part in the "Marriage" because it is of a relgious nature. Also, this is the reason you can't take relgion out of the question while talking about Marriage. That's just what I think.

If they want to call it something else IE "civil Union" then that's thier choice. I don't agree with the life style, but they have the "right" to live with one single person the rest of thier lives. They will, however, have to deal with the Consiquences of living a life of sin when they die. I think homosexual rights might actually gain some ground if they didn't want it to be called marriage.

Quote:
But, there is adoption and there is artificial insemination, which many gay couples do!!
So how do Gay men do Artificial Insemination? Is it like the Movie "Junior"? That was probably, by far, the best Arnold movie. :tonka: "GET THIS BABY INTO THE CHOPPER AND OUT OF MY STOMACH!!!!"

In all serisousness though, you still need the male and female part (Cellular) to make a child. Something a Gay couple will never be able to do. Maybe that's because it was meant to be M/F not M/M or F/F. I'm not saying that they can't bring a child up any better or worst then a Straight couple. I'm just saying that when it comes to the making process, there's only one way (all Sexual Postion jokes aside).

Last edited by L4CX; May 20th, 2008 at 08:21 AM.
L4CX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 08:47 AM   #78
guest
.
 
Join Date: 12-14-06
Location: .
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to guest
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueydChevygal View Post
But, there is adoption and there is artificial insemination, which many gay couples do!!
So now your saying a guy can get prego?
guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 09:12 AM   #79
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,784
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
Default

this discussion is scaring me.
mikesova is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 11:05 AM   #80
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,111
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
First, to address the original question, Yes, the Supreme Court and the right, and the responsibility to rule on whether laws are valid and constitutional. Imagine if it was your civil rights that a new law took away? Wouldn't you want some branch of government looking our for you rights?

That said, I think they are wrong in this case. I don't see that a law defining "marriage" as a bond between a man and a woman as a violation of anyones rights. It's the same for everyone. Everyone has the right to go find a willing able member of the opposite sex and get married. If you have decided that that type of relationship is not right for you and you want to do something else, thats fine, but I don't recognize your right to redefine "marriage" to include your "something else" just because it fits your needs and desires.

But I see bigger issue here that rarely get brought up. That is; Why is the government involved in the business of defining what "marriage" at all?

To answer my own question... I see 2 reasons;

1. To allow a couple to combine their resources and plan a permanent future together including joint ownership of property, inheritance of assets without having to have a will or involving lengthy court proceedings, the ability to have access to each others medical records and to make medical decisions for each other, and probably other things I'm not thinking of that help a couple live and a couple.

2. To make it easier for parents to care for kids, easing the financial burdens through tax breaks, family medical leave acts, joint insurance, and all the other things that are done to try to keep parents together and make it easier for them to joints acre for children.

So heres what I think should happen;

first, remove the word "marriage" from all laws and government code. Let "marriage" be something that is defined by the organization that if preforming the ceremony, but legally it means nothing.

Then, untangle and rewrite the laws.

Allow any couple homo or heterosexual to be able get the benefits of being a couple, call it something else, I don't care what.

Allow any family, defined as committed parents raising children, "married" or not, homo or heterosexual, to get the benifits of being a family.
I agree with you for the most part, but calling it marriage or calling it something else doesn't change it. You're really just arguing semantics.

So if we let those who are married in a church be "married" and let everyone else be "unioned". Legallly, what's the difference? Nothing, so why call it something else?
3-foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Tags
buuuttseeeeeeexxxxxxx, coffee, dave kerwin, do my pooper!, doomsick loves dick., fag lovers, gay jay hall, jelly beans, lothos, punch faygs, sore o-ring, star trek

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:52 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.36930 seconds with 80 queries